You be the Agent! Making the hard choices.
 

You are an airline phone or gate agent. What do you do in the following circumstances?

1. There is a transoceanic flight with one business class seat open. Your airline, as a matter of policy, says that a certain low fare is not upgradeable. Who do you upgrade?
A: The 100K flyer with the non-upgradeable fare who was quite insistent that he is one of the airline’s best customers, and the rule should be waived for him.
B. Another 100K flyer with the non-upgradeable fare, who didn’t ask for the upgrade.
C. A 50K flyer with an upgradeable fare.
D. A 25K flyer who was nice and gave you chocolates.
E. A no status flyer, willing to pay miles.
F. No one..

2. Same question, but 2 seats are open. Who do you upgrade?
A. A 100K flyer and his companion (no status), with upgradeable fares.
B. A couple, each with 50K status.
C. The two flyers with the most status, but not their companions.
D. The honeymoon couple with no status, who are making out in the waiting area.
E. No one.

3. You are a phone agent, and Mr 100K calls. Your airline tracks each call, so you see that this caller has called 5 different times trying to get a waiver on a $100 fee for changing his return routing. You
A. Give him the waiver, even though it is against policy.
B. Make a note on his record.
C. Hand him off to a supervisor.

4. A 50K flyer (who normally must call 72 hours in advance for an upgrade) told the agent he is using a special upgrade certificate, and then can reserve a upgrade 4 weeks in advance. At the gate, he does not produce the certificate, but wants to use his normal (72-hour) coupons to upgrade. You:
A. Upgrade a 100K flyer instead.
B. Insist that he produce the special certificate, otherwise give the seat away.
C. Let him slide and take the normal upgrade.
D. Upgrade him with the normal upgrade, but add a note to his record.
E. Quit and work for Burger King.


[This message has been edited by opus17 (edited 02-25-2001).]

OK, I'll bite.

1. C (doing a favor for the top tier flyer hurts someone else who is entitled to the upgrade)
2. A (not exactly the same circumstances as 1-on most airlines, companions assume the same elite level as the elite flyer)
3. C (bump it upstairs so that Mr 1K quits bothering everyone)
4. B (I dislike people who try to scam me and lots of people try to scam me)

I agree with Bill's answers.

It all depends on the company's policies as to what you do, or if you override them, what kind of doo-doo you get into when you make an unauthorized decision!

Totally agree with Bill.

Really cannot stand scammers... or people who believe they do not need to follow the rules like everyone else.

William

Opus,

Just curious...did this happen to you?

Dan

No, but if you scan across the airline boards, you see these discussions, with several answers represented.

I purposely did not pick a particular airline, so I am being vague about some of the rules (like companions).

I would do C, C, B, B. But you can find cuurent threads on some airline boards (hint: Delta, United) that complain about the airlines following their own rules and not making exceptions such as these.

The first 2 questions show that upgrades are a zero-sum gain -- with a finite numnber of seats, someone wins at the expense of someone else. Do we prefer clear rules, or is it survival of the fittest?

The third question afects only the airline and the flyer -- although it may not be fair to others who have to pay the fee.

The fourth question is one of ethics. Yet there were protests on both the United and Delta boards when similar loopholes were closed...

[This message has been edited by opus17 (edited 02-25-2001).]

Interesting!

I agree with Bill. The companion wrinkle is interesting. If the companion was my wife, I would expect I would sit with her wherever. If it was a business companion then I would expect another 100k should get the finite seat (If he/she was with their spouse I would also defer!)

The agent obviously would need to be told the circumstance.....and this might already be construed as becoming a nag.

I am also intrigued by the issue of profiling the pnr. What do you mean by
"tracking" the calls? Do you mean that a notation is made by the agent each time a call is made on that pnr or is it somehow automaticallly tracked by big brAAther?



[This message has been edited by GreyOwl (edited 02-25-2001).]

C, A, C, B

------------------
"Sire, it is not a revolt. It is a Revolution!"

A recent post by a former Delta agent says this is done on that airline.

Without knowing the rules of that airline with regard to companion upgrades, and Simply Good Business (I must say that some of your examples look familiar...)

1. C or E (depends who asked first, the company gets something positive out of both; Depending on any waitlist priority, I might not have a choice).

2. A

3. B (Is it your job to pass this to a supervisor unless the customer asks to speak to one?)

4. B

[This message has been edited by james (edited 02-26-2001).]

I object to Question 1.

A multiple-choice question never has 6 answers.

Especially when a question is related to the airline industry. In this case there is only one answer: "No"

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/wink.gif




[This message has been edited by Craig6z (edited 02-26-2001).]

C...A...C...B

C
A
C
B

1. C/E
2. C
3. B
4. B

Reaaalllly? Some would interpret your initiative to log on to this board as being a scammer. If an agent offered to break the rules on your behalf to upgrade you, without being prompted, are you going to refuse?

Personally, I am rules driven, but if a good deal falls in my lap, I don't look the gift horse in the mouth.

I will ask a question that might be geared toward bending or even breaking the rules. If the answer comes back as "negative", I cease and desist. I am not sure there is any harm in asking.

I have no problem with the FF food chain. On AA, if I get aced out by an EXP (I am PLT), that is fine; they have earned it. Conversely, I may have to put a footprint on the back of the neck of some hapless GLD. It is survival of the fittest. You know that going in; if you don't, you will know soon enough.

If life has taught me anything, there is a lot of equilibrium out there. Some you win, some you lose. Sometimes you get what you deserve, sometimes you do not. I feel that I have gotten my share of good deals, most within the confines of the rules.

I can't characterize all scams, or scammers, as bad. Some of their actions have likely gotten us all where we are today. I have gotten the "what a scammer!" look when I file into the first-class line at the airport in my blue jeans and running shoes, but I earned the right to be there.

Sometimes you are the windshield, sometimes you are the bug!

FlyAAway,

I did not say I would not accept a "gift" if offerred by the airlines. (THAT WOULD BE CRAZY!!! RIGHT?)

But I can honestly say I have never asked for an upgrade that I was not willing to pay for. In fact, I actually called to let them know they forgot to take certificates out of my account for such an upgrade.

When I say scammer, I am referring to people who call in pretending to have one type of certificate that gets them priority when they never plan to actually have/or use at check-in.

I also have a tendency to sit near the check-in desks at the gates. It is amazing what you hear people trying. I once overheard a man telling a sob story about a death of his child to the agent... and got a free upgrade. Guess who I was sitting beside? I started talking about Flyertalk.com and the wonderful advice I find here. He then actually told me the "story" he told the agent... and said, and I quote "That dead kid story get me upgraded to first about 80% of the time." I was appalled... and actually refused to talk to him for the remainder of the flight.

Just my two cents... feel free to give me three cents in change... http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

William

I am curious as to how people look at the word "companion"?

If an elite is able to upgrade their spouse, what about unmarried or gay people?

I believe it should just be ability to upgrade one person WHO IS ON THE SAME PNR.

Any other thoughts?

William

Yes.

1. C

2. C (Choice A is tough, if there's >1 100K flyer with a companion)

3. C (Yep, let the boss earn his pay.)

4. B (Agree with BillMorrow--don't like the grifter move/people who insults your intelligence)

1) C - You can't be upgraded if you have a non upgradable fare, if you wanted an upgrade you should have paid a bit more for the ticket. If you have a zillion miles you know that. If the no status flyer had an upgradable fare, and they asked before C did then I'd probably take him first.

2) A - I would consider a companion as somebody flying on the same record or whatever as you. If I bought two tickets, one for myself with a status of diamond zillion miles and one for anybody else (related or not), and both were upgradable fares, I would expect we would both be treated the same, both get on early, both the special check in etc.

3) C - the note is in his record, and every time he calls he's keeping you from dealing with somebody who really needs your assistance. Rules are rules, let the supervisor tell him that.

4) Gonna make my own choice here, I'd stick him in after all the 72 hour people since he probably made up the special 4 week certificate. If there is room after everybody who played fair, then he goes, if not middle seat in the last row.

C,A,C,B

I agree with spiff. Except in the case of the companion being a spouse then I go with C for question number 2. In the case of question 3. If you tell the person no they will want to speak to the sup. anyway.



[This message has been edited by toadman (edited 02-26-2001).]

C, A, C, B. The important thing is that you do SOMETHING. Too often, airline personnel seen to do nothing because it's easier than having to make these types of decisions.

C, A, C, B

As for upgrading companions, it shouldn't matter if they are on the same PNR. You should be able to upgrade whoever you want on your flight as long as you (or the companion) have upgrades certificates or the miles needed for an upgrade.

I think the real contentious one is #2. Different airlines have different policies. As a matter of fact, the same airline sometimes has two policies. See United, for example. You companion has your status until a few hours before departure, then on the upgrade list at the gate, each passenger has their own status.

I've thought about this quite a bit, and I think UA's policy is the best. Why you ask? Because it's a difficult problem to resolve, so we keep a leg in each policy (no companion status/companion status) with enough flexibility to resolve difficult situations at the gate.

The DM list is quite massageable by the gate agent. So even if your companion is separated from you, there is always some room for flexibility.

I think a companion should be a significant other (married or officially partnered, who, after all, put up with all the travelling) or a direct family member like your 90 year-old mum. Your boss stays in coach. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/wink.gif

Or perhaps, the companion policy should apply only to 100K- since those benefits are indeed eroding these days.
Hence CACB

[This message has been edited by Droneklax (edited 02-26-2001).]

First of all the gate agent needs flexibility in the rules in order to be proficient at their job. That being said, if that same gate agent doesn’t have the experience to know when to use it we never get out of the dilemma.

I would g with CCCB. This is why…

1) That 50k flier did earn the right for the seat and shouldn’t get the boot simply because someone else chooses to rant. I frequently see people ranting about this or that at the gates and all I can think is “what a fool that person is.” I would give then nothing, but being as polite as possible. If that were actually to happen to me I would tell Mr./Mrs. 100k that in order to give them the upgrade I would have to remove someone else who has earned the right to sit up front. I have seen agents who might even suggest that Mr./Mrs. 100k go around asking the F passengers if they would be willing to trade seats. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/wink.gif

2) Again, quite simply, as much as you try, you can’t please everyone all the time. Let them know that if the situation changes you will do your best to accommodate them.

3) I would say “sir you have called 5 times before on this same subject. Since it is clear that with your patronage of our airline we value you as a customer, I truly wish you did not need to make the change that has put you in the position to ask us to reject our policies.” Then I would wait for them to jabber and just give them a sympathetic ear. Quite frankly, it’s only 100 bucks, that’s not much cash but the situation becomes a win or lose game. The goal would be to let Mr. 100k know that he already won the game by us accommodating his change request.

4) Produce the certificate or go away.

I'll agree with the majority on the first three, but I'm going to be the outsider on #4 and say "C".

[list=1][*]The first question is ambiguous; if I interpret this correctly, I'm going with E, on the basis that it's wrong to give comps when someone else is willing to give up money, miles, or certificates.[*]A. A companion on the same record should receive the same treatment as the sponsoring elite passenger.[*]C. Make it somebody else's problem.[*]B. The airline held up its end of the bargain, the passenger did not. If there's only one seat available, this results in A, unless no one waiting for an upgrade outranks him, in which case C.[/list=a]

Clever, EPS, for picking that up... you actually intepreted the question as I intended it -- that only the non-stauts passenger was volunteering up front to surrender miles.

My use of gender-specific pronouns was also on purpose...

How come no one wanted to give the upgrade to the honeymooners? Am I the only one who's a sucker for this type of thing? Some really jaded travelers here. C'mon give the kids a break. ;-)

Because the oversized "handicapped" lav is in the back, and they would be better served with seats in those "special" rows traditionally blocked from preassignment.

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/biggrin.gif

Does a Denver Red Carpet Club conference room count for Mile High Club credit?

I think the consensus is primarly C/E,A,C,B

I personally chose E since as an airline agent I'd rather get someone to give up something of value for the upgrade rather than 'comp' it.

I would NOT let the scammer through; heck, I'd put the scammer in a middle coach seat to teach him a lesson.

Hey, I said E for Q1... anything to reduce the company's liability http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/wink.gif

Seriously though, remind me never to employ most of you - those who said 'pass it on to someone else, I can't be bothered' for Q3 should be ashamed http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/wink.gif

I consulted the Rules Committee of the MHC; not only does it qualify, but they pay reverent homage to your cunning and perserverance. Nicely done!

Man, this is a great thread. (I shouldn't say that since I started it, but don't worrry, I won't cross post it to every other thread on the board, create false identities to promote it and then claim it is the most popular thread ever... I won't, honest).

No, it is great because the answers are so inconsistent to established FT dogma, as seen on the airline boards.

"FT dogma" has never been written down, but I have extracted it from the content of posts I have been reading for two years on this board.

Question 1: FT dogma is that no fares should be non-upgradeable, especially for elites. On Delta, there are constant posts about L and U fares, and how that they cannot be upgraded, and what a crime against humanity that it. On the United forum, people are complaining that the mistake $29 fare to Paris cannot be upgraded! A number of posts over the years suggest strategies to get upgraded using non-upgradeable fares. Hounding the gate agent and bribing with chocolates seem to be popular techniques!

Question 3: FT dogma states that elites should never pay fees. On the Delta board, "Simply Good Business" (Delta's policy of no waivers, no favors) is derided daily. On United, people advise to call and call again until you get the answer you want to hear. (BTW, a former Delta agent confirmed recently that the airline does make a record of every phone call received on a PNR).

Question 4: The strategy of "bait and switch" on certs was widely touted some time back on the United board (it appears that UA is now cracking down on this). A similar tactic was also promoted on the Delta board.


Question 2: The companion policy does differ by airline. Delta never transfers status to the companion, while United does, but not for the airport wait list. There seems to be wide consensus that the companion should get the higher status. Some people think that should only apply to spouses or significant others (how is the airline supposed to figure that out?). I wonder if people seek status for their own comfort, or to "show off"? (I purposely asked the question from a "male" point of view -- sexist, I know, but I feared different answers if I made the high status flyer female.

Anyway, when the questions were asked from an airline point-of-view, it seems we (as a group) are much more strict on the rules than would be indicated otherwise on this board!


[This message has been edited by opus17 (edited 02-28-2001).]

It seems that perhaps there is no room for the old "what's good for the goose is good for the gander" philosophy where each of OUR own miles and upgrades are concerned! http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/wink.gif

And even if it is truly destined to be the greatest thread ever, records were indeed made to be broken! Right? http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/biggrin.gif

I'd venture to say that we are much more strict since we are usually the ones entitled to these services, and if they are given to the people who are not (say the honeymoon couple) one of us will be sitting in coach while they ride up front. I'm sure a sampling on the street of people without a vested interest would give much different results.

Cordelli, I disagree with your comment,

"I'm sure a sampling on the street of people without a vested interest would give much different results."

If you replace upgrade with some generic, but earned perk, I'm sure that the answers would be similar. Most people in the civilized world are willing to work within the boundaries we create for ourselves, "Laws". The more we do this the more civilized we become by definition. Perhaps this tread suggests that we are in fact civilized and not just a bunch of "upgrade me now for free or I'll never fly your airline again!!" fanatics. Or, maybe not.

Duedmon, I agree with what you are saying, what I meant was ask a group of people on the street who don't give a rats ... about flying or upgrades, where it makes no matter to them at all, and the honeymooners will get the seats all of the time. If you ask people who can be hurt by the decision you will get one answer, if you ask people who have no care one way or the other then the sob stories will probably win out.